FULL STORY WITH LINKS
The SPLC suffered a blow to its legitimacy today when 22 congressional Republicans (including Steve King and Lamar Smith) and numerous other prominent figures in the conservative movement signed a statement condemning the SPLC as a “liberal fundraising machine” and a radical leftwing organization trying to shutdown informed discussion on important public policy issues.
This effectively pulls down the curtain on the SPLC’s influence as a “watchdog group” in conservative circles. Their various exposes of “hate” and “bigotry” will now be read and taken seriously only by their fellow likeminded progressives. The statement consigns the SPLC to the same ideological ghetto that the NAACP now occupies in the eyes of White America.
Alinsky Lessons
In Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky repeatedly stressed the point that the right thing in politics is almost always done for the wrong reasons. If you want to win an important victory in politics, you will usually have to seize upon the wrong reasons to mobilize a sufficient number of people who do not necessarily agree with you to support your course of action:
Alinsky’s field of action was the field of change and a constant stream of conflict. Alinsky knew that in today’s world, people are not motivated by altruism, you need to somehow appeal to their self-interest. The right thing usually done for the wrong reasons. When he came into a community in order to organize it, he had to get the local churches involved. He said that he never appealed to the ministers or priests in terms of Christian principles because they did not really believe in Christianity. Therefore, Alinsky appealed to what really motivated them, their self-interests and talked more about membership and more money. It worked every time.
This book is full of so many gems of good practical advice. You won’t understand my change of approach until you read it. I can flip through the book and find excerpts that address many of the comments I get here on a daily basis:
But the answer I gave the young radicals seemed to me the only realistic one: “Do one of three things. One, go find a wailing wall and feel sorry for yourselves. Two, go psycho and start bombing — but this only swings people to the right. Three, learn a lesson. Go home, organize, build power and at the next convention, you be the delegates.”
The psychos and the wailing wallers are ubiquitous in the pro-White movement. The pragmatic realists are a much rarer breed:
With very rare exceptions, the right things are done for the wrong reasons. It is futile to demand that men do the right thing for the right reason — this is a fight with a windmill.
Alinsky stressed the importance of incremental compromise:
But to the organizer, compromise is a key and beautiful word. It is always present in the pragmatics of operation. It is making the deal, getting that vital breather, usually the victory. If you start with nothing, demand 100 per cent, then compromise for 30 per cent, you’re 30 per cent ahead.
I came away from Alinsky a much more effective radical than I had been before. I started seeing all the “square” conservatives in a new light, not as gullible lemmings or enemies of my agenda, but people who I could work with who already agree with me on the most important issues.
If we don’t reach these people and influence them, our progressives enemies like the neocons will succeed in doing it, and we will be setback and left worse off than we were before.
Late To The Party
The Family Research Council and these other Christian groups didn’t see the light until their own ox was gored and the SPLC miscalculated and tarred them with the “hate group” label. That’s fine with me.
Misery loves company.
It is better to arrive late to the party than to not show up at all. Now the SPLC can be denounced as “anti-Christian” and as a partisan leftwing organization that considers the Bible to be “hate speech.” That’s not why White Advocates oppose the SPLC, but it is a message that can be sold to other bigger White constituencies to provoke them into opposition to the likes of Mark Potok and Heidi Beirich, which has the same effective result.
This statement only made our task of discrediting the SPLC easier. I fail to see what exactly the problem is here.
